Islamic preacher Zakir Naik’s state visit to Pakistan proves how the nation bankrolls radicalism

In recent developments, Islamic preacher Zakir Naik’s state visit to Pakistan has drawn significant international attention and ignited debates on the country’s political endorsement of religious hardliners.

Naik, a controversial figure known for his radical and polarizing statements, was invited to Pakistan in what many perceive as a strategic political move to solidify domestic religious sentiments and project Pakistan’s ideological stance globally.

Pakistan’s decision to welcome controversial preacher Zakir Naik for a state visit did not go down well with several sections of the society.

A Christian Bishop, clearly miffed by his comments against his community, wrote a letter to President Asif Ali Zardari against the Muslim preacher who had to escape India in 2016 after the country accused him of money laundering and inciting extremism.

Zakir Naik is an Islamic televangelist and founder of the Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) in India.

Over the past two decades, he has gained widespread attention and millions of followers worldwide for his public talks on comparative religion.

However, his preachings have not been without controversies.

His speeches, which have included derogatory comments on other religions and perceived justifications for acts of extremism, have led to numerous calls for investigations and bans.

Countries like India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Canada, and the United Kingdom have taken a firm stance against Naik, imposing bans on his entry or prosecuting his activities on national security grounds.

Naik recently visited Pakistan for a month-long preaching tour.

His recent visit to Pakistan, marked by official meetings and public appearances, sends a powerful message about Pakistan’s political inclinations.

The invitation to a figure like Zakir Naik, whose rhetoric is often seen as divisive, is viewed by critics as a conscious effort by Pakistan to align itself with radical voices in the Islamic world.

It underscores an ongoing trend where Pakistan is perceived to be using religion as a tool for both internal political gain and external diplomatic signaling.

Naik’s visit was completed last week but as was expected he fuelled certain controversies during his stay in the Muslim-majority nation.

Distressed by his controversial comments, Church of Pakistan official Rev Azad Marshall wrote a letter to the President and said his remarks caused “religious offence” to Pakistani Christians.

He opined that the Indian preacher’s comments ‘disrespected’ the spirit of  Quaid-i-Azam (Muhammad Ali Jinnah)’ s Aug 11, 1947 address to the Constituent Assembly for an inclusive and impartial government, religious freedom, rule of law ,and equality for all in Pakistan.

Despite all these controversies, it is still not clear what led the Pakistani government to select such a person as its state guest.

Even after knowing about his long-time practice of making strange comments that might not be accepted by all sections of society, Pakistan gave Zakir Naik a free run in the country to address people during his one-month stay.

He has not been convicted in neighbouring India so far but he was forced to leave the country and flee to Malaysia.

Pakistani authorities kept their eyes blindfolded to Naik’s past while honoring him as its state visitor.

Pakistan’s leading English daily the Dawn pointed to the risk the South Asian Islamist nation undertook by inviting such a man to the country.

“It should be asked why an individual with such antecedents was invited as a state guest to Pakistan. Dr Naik spoke to packed crowds and was given regal treatment, meeting the high and mighty of the land, including the prime minister,” the Editorial said.

“There is, of course, nothing wrong with scholars discussing theological issues, historical events tied to faith or comparative religion in an academic setting, within the bounds of mutual respect. But when these sensitive questions are debated in a populist and controversial fashion — as Dr Naik did in his rapid-fire style — they are bound to cause communal discord,” it said.

This was not the first time Zakir Naik was visiting Pakistan. In 1992, Naik had last visited the South Asian country.

Naik’s hardline religious views forced several nations, including India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the UK, to ban the religious preacher.

Zakir Naik even had an indirect link to a terror act in Bangladesh which forced the government to suspend Peace TV that promoted his preachings.

A section of the Bangladeshi media had reported that those who attacked the Holey Artisan Bakery in Dhaka in 2016 were Naik’s devotees and followers.

The Islamic State terror group had taken responsibility for the attack which had shocked Bangladesh claiming 29 lives.

Naik had once apologised for making sensitive remarks.

Malaysian police even banned him from public speaking in 2019. He was also interrogated for several hours due to remarks that triggered a row.

Ahead of Naik’s Pakistan visit,  Amit Ranjan, a research fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies, National University of Singapore, told DW: “Being Pakistan’s state guest, it will not benefit the social and religious fabric of the country.”

Pakistan’s state endorsement of  Zakir Naik highlights the nation’s precarious balancing act between religious hardliners and moderate reformists.

It is reflective of a larger trend in which countries grapple with the competing pressures of religious conservatism and the demand for progressive reform.

In Pakistan, this balancing act often tips in favour of hardliners due to their significant influence on electoral outcomes and their street power.

The implications of Naik’s state visit to Pakistan extend beyond national politics, affecting international perceptions and diplomatic relations.

Pakistani journalist Lucman told India Today news channel that whenever he listens to Naik he feels he is spewing hatred.

“Muslim scholars and those scholars influence me have only preached love, sharing and harmony. Every time I listen to Naik, I feel he is spewing hatred. Someone must have done something to him when he was very young and that is coming out now. He should not be allowed to give public sermons,” Lucman said.

The Indian government had also criticised Pakistan’s state invitation for Naik and the country’s Ministry of External Affairs called the move as highly condemnable.

However, Pakistan’s stance towards hardliners became clear when Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif not only met Naik but also lauded him for spreading the teachings of the Holy Quran and promoting Islamic values worldwide.

He said the Muslim world was proud of him for projecting the real image of Islam across the world.

Critics argue that by embracing figures like Naik, Pakistan risks isolating itself from progressive Muslim voices.

The move reflects a deeper political calculus that prioritizes hardliner appeasement over addressing concerns about extremism.

In the end, Naik’s visit is not just a matter of hospitality; it is a statement about Pakistan’s ideological leanings and the nation’s ongoing struggle to define its identity in an increasingly polarized world.